For over 120 years, the High Court of Australia has been the law’s final word.

But has one state said more than the rest?

More than half the Court’s 57 justices have come from NSW — Australia’s most populous state.

NSW’s composition sits at 29 judges or 51% of all Justices on the High Court, which means we’re way ahead of its population share (~31%).

This isn’t new. NSW has held the majority whip from the start, with Sir Edmund Barton and Richard O'Connor making up two-thirds of the High Court’s original bench.

Here’s the state-by-state High Court breakdown:

Victoria comes next with 16 (28%).

The University of Sydney and Melbourne Law School produced wave after wave of appointees — from Barton, Isaacs and Dixon through to Mason, Kirby and Gleeson.

NSW and VIC make up nearly 80% of the bench, even though the two states make up just over half of Australia’s population.

South Australia and Tasmania¹ are the glaring blanks. Not a single Justice in 120 years.

The same goes for territories ACT and NT.

That’s despite SA and Tassie’s rich legal tradition. Even ex-Tassie Supreme Court Judge Andrew Inglis Clark never made it onto the Court, and he literally helped draft Australia’s Constitution. Likewise, Sir John Downer, a South Australian founding father, was floated for the original bench in 1903, but missed out.

The drought has lasted ever since.

Across the Nullarbor, WA was left out until 1979, when Sir Ronald Wilson joined.

Since then, the mining State has managed a handful of appointments — most famously Robert French (2008), the first West Aussie Chief Justice.

At least WA has present-day representation, with James Edelman’s appointment in 2017. But with only four WA justices,² the state remains undercooked compared to its population share.

Queensland has produced just 8 (14%) justices, but some of the biggest names: Samuel Griffith (the founding Chief Justice), Gerard Brennan, and Susan Kiefel, who became Australia’s first female Chief Justice in 2017.

Still, QLD’s representation is patchy at best, with long gaps between appointments and never more than two justices at once.

There’s been 14 CJs since the Court’s inception.

The top job shows even sharper state lines.

The leadership baton has passed between NSW, VIC, and QLD, with one cameo from WA.

Australia’s High Court appointment process is largely done behind closed doors. The Attorney-General consults with each State AG, along with senior judges and lawyers, to curate a shortlist.

Not that it matters, right?

The judiciary has long stood by “strict and complete legalism” — Dixon’s famous mantra that judges simply apply law, not their own values.

If judging is just about legal method, then it doesn’t matter whether a Justice comes from Sydney, Melbourne or Perth. Neutral law means neutral state lines.

But, on Nettle’s and Bell’s retirement, many even expected “like-for-like” replacements — a Victorian for a Victorian, a NSW judge for a NSW judge. And that’s exactly what happened.

More recently, as Michael Pelly of Capital Brief points out, state lines appear to influence more than most would like to admit. Geography is bolstering up judicial blocs — the four NSW judges, Gageler, Gleeson, Jagot and Beech-Jones, often align in one camp, while Gordon (VIC), Edelman (WA) and Steward (VIC) are in another.

Looks like the map of Australia still leaves its fingerprints on the bench.